virtualization
Latest
VMware Fusion 1.1.2 adds Time Machine support
Over on the blog for VMware Fusion, they've announced the release of version 1.1.2 which adds support for Time Machine backups of your virtual machines. Apparently 10.5.2 fixed some problem that prevented virtual machines from being backed up properly and they have now enabled it. They warn, however, that since Time Machine backs up anything that changes, and virtual machines tend to be rather large, you may want to exclude certain virtual machines to avoid losing too much space on your backup drive. The new version also adds support for the MacBook Air (fixing a problem with the virtual drive), Windows XP SP3 Boot Camp partitions, and simplified Chinese, as well as quashing various bugs.VMware Fusion 1.1.2 is a free update for registered users and $79.99 otherwise.Thanks to everyone who sent this in!
TUAW hands on with CrossOver Games
We posted about the release of CrossOver Games a little while ago -- it's a version of Codeweavers' Windows virtualization software that allows Windows games to be played on OS X and Linux. I grabbed a copy of the software for TUAW, and spent an afternoon running it through its paces.You can check out the hands-on after the break -- after installing CrossOver Games, I first tried to load up Guild Wars using their installer's package interface, and was able to get it working pretty well. I then tried one of my favorite games, Civilization 4, and unfortunately, that one didn't turn out quite so well. And just for kicks, I also gave F.E.A.R. a shot -- it's not on CrossOver's compatibility list at all, but I've had a copy sitting around for a while that I haven't played yet, so I let the virtualization app take a crack at getting it working.The hands-on is in this simple and easy-to-use (which is more than I can say about CrossOver Games) gallery format -- just click the picture furthest to the left down there and begin our journey into the exciting world of virtualization and game installation. I can tell you're excited already.%Gallery-20700%Update: Arjun found the problem with Civ in the comments; apparently only the Steam version is compatible. Which vibes with the rest of what I found: if you want to play any of the Steam or built-in games with CrossOver, they'll likely work just fine. But if you want to install another game from a CD (especially unsupported games), you're out of luck.
Parallels webcast today launches Virtuozzo Containers server
Despite the publicity around Parallels' flagship Mac product, Parallels Desktop (which we've contributed to in some small part), there are some other interesting tools in the stable of Parallels' parent company, SWsoft -- which is now being rebranded as Parallels, Inc. just to keep us on our toes. One of those products is Parallels Virtuozzo Containers (PVC), which launches version 4.0 today in a webcast event at 11 am (Eastern). While PVC is not a Mac-compatible server (yet), the technology choices Parallels made in developing it may illuminate some future paths for the yet-unreleased Parallels Server product for Mac OS X. Virtualization products like Parallels Desktop, VMware Fusion, and Microsoft's Virtual Server work via a hypervisor model, virtualizing the hardware platform so that each virtual machine runs in its own full-OS environment. This approach does a great job of insulating the VMs from the underlying physical hardware and provides for OS and build diversity (Windows, Linux and eventually Mac OS X Server running on the same virtualization platform) but it has some drawbacks: each virtual machine consumes a full helping of RAM, disk space and CPU resources while running, as though it was a physical machine. VMware in particular is respected for its expertise in optimizing these resource demands with its ESX enterprise-level server products, but the baseline requirements for system resources can't be fully alleviated. PVC does OS virtualization, which tackles the problem of resource allocation for virtual machines in a different way. Virtuozzo VMs, or "containers," are created as overlays on the base OS that runs on the physical server, like a piece of transparent acetate over an animation backdrop. All the basic OS processes, files and libraries are present in the base server OS instance, and the container holds the differential changes that allow the VMs their individual characteristics and configurations. While you sacrifice one big feature of hypervisor systems, the ability to diversify OSes -- since the base OS is fixed as either Windows or Linux, all the containers have to be built on top of that OS -- what you gain is substantial, as each additional running VM takes only a small chunk of RAM and a comparatively tiny swath of hard drive space to work in. Virtuozzo servers can handle high VM loading on relatively modest hardware without taking major performance hits, which is a big plus if your server budget is constrained. In the OS X virtualization session at Macworld Expo, the Parallels folks suggested that we may see both hypervisor and OS virtualization approaches integrated in the Parallels Server product, as the engineering teams from PVC and Server have the opportunity to put their heads together. Parallels has also said that the management tools for PVC and Parallels Server will be integrated as development moves forward. Even though PVC doesn't support the Mac directly, if you're interested in virtualization you might pop into the webcast and check it out.
VMware Fusion Updated to version 1.1.1
Although I am, and always will be, a devoted user of Apple products, the Macintosh and OSX, occasionally I find the need to do something that only the vagaries of Windows can accomplish. In the past, this required me to have a separate computer (a PC) with an install of Windows. Fortunately, with Apple's switch to all Intel all the time, I no longer need that other Windows PC and instead can use a "virtual" Windows PC running on my Mac with the help of a software product provided by Parallels or VMware.In the past, I was a big fan of Parallels and used it exclusively. More recently, though, I have switched to VMware Fusion for my Windows virtualization needs. Nothing against Parallels, its still a great product, but I just find VMware a bit more "Mac-like" and easier to setup and use. If you agree and use VMware Fusion as well, head on over to their website because there's an update to the software waiting there just for you.This update is, according to the VMware site: "a maintenance release that contains fixes for a variety of issues." What might these issues be, you may wonder? Well, if you really want to know, feel free to read the release notes. Or, if you decide to just "go for it" and not read the fine print, go here and download away.
Show floor video: VMWare now upgrades your VirtualPC, virtualizes Leopard server
Earlier this week we gave Parallels a turn, and today it's VMWare in the spotlight. Scott spoke to Pat Lee, senior product manager for VMWare, about Fusion, virtualizing Leopard server, upgrading from VirtualPC (there's now an importer for VirtualPC 7) and more.Also available on: YouTube, Metacafe, DailyMotion, Blip.tv and Crackle
Show floor video: Parallels Server virtualizes OS X Server
While VMware's OS X virtualization offering is described as a 'technology preview' (translation: still too buggy for beta), the team at Parallels is beta-ready with the new Parallels Server product, allowing you to virtualize OS X Server alongside your Windows, Windows Server and Linux VMs. The server version from 'Big Red' also features experimental support for Intel's VT-d directed I/O capability (present on the newest Mac Pro and XServe machines), lightweight and 'bare metal/headless' hypervisor modes, and 2-way SMP multicore in a VM (expected to support 4-way SMP in the final version).Feel the power of this mostly operational virtualization station in our brief video demo with Parallels marketing lead Ben Rudolph (video after the jump). Pricing and availability on Parallels Server aren't announced yet but as soon as they are we'll let you know.Update: Commenters have suggested that 'too buggy for beta' was an unfair characterization of VMware's demo, and they're probably right -- I did not mean to diminish the incredible efforts of developers at VMware, who like the Parallels crew have been working very hard on this. Also suggested was the notion that Parallels Server beta is an inferior offering and it can't install an unmodified copy of Leopard Server (as VMware's demo did -- the video linked on Regis' blog was shot by me :-). I can't vouch for the install process, but I can say that the Parallels instance of X Server worked as expected when I had hands-on time with it. Parallels is not new, corporately, to the challenge of enterprise virtualization; the Virtuozzo product line is both reliable and well-regarded, and the engineering talent behind those products is now collaborating on the Parallels Server work.
Beta Beat: Parallels Server beta begins
The long history of the Parallels Server release is moving ever closer to an end: SWsoft (which is changing their name to Parallels) has announced that the product has moved into beta. This thing is the holy grail for Mac server administrators, apparently-- it's supposed to not only be the first virtualization solution to run on Apple hardware, but will also allow admins to run multiple versions of Leopard on one box, and even on Windows or Linux servers. I'm pretty clueless at fine art of administering servers, but even I can see how that would have all the IT guys in a tizzy.It's still a closed beta at this point, so you've got to sign up if you want to experience the magic for yourself. And apparently the Parallels folks work fast, so odds are we're headed for an open beta within a few weeks. Soon, Mac OS Server will be at the mercy of any IT overseers to bend and use at their will.
Gaming-specific CrossOver coming soon
MacWindows reports that CrossOver (which was already doing pretty well with Windows games inside OS X) is planning to release a gaming-optimized version of their virtualization software. It'll be called CrossOver Gaming, and while we're not actually given details of how it's going to be "optimized" for games, we are told that it will be compatible with more Windows games than ever before.Additionally, the new version will actually be a subscription model-- instead of just buying the software, you'll pay $5 a month (presumably for quick updates on brand new games). Other than that, we're not quite sure what advantage CrossOver's system will have over, say, running games in Windows via Boot Camp (seems to me that if you have the hardware to run Windows games, you have the hardware to run Windows and games at the same time), but we'll have to see-- CrossOver says the new Gaming version is due sometime later this year.[Via IMG]
Parallels vs. VMWare: Benchmark results
Like it or not, lots of us who own Intel-based Macs have to run Windows from time to time. Although Boot Camp is pretty fantastic if you need to run a processor intensive application (or you want to play games), virtualization is the more attractive solution for users who need to access productivity applications, like Microsoft Office 2007, but don't want to have to live in the Windows environment. The two big players in the virtualization field are VMWare's Fusion and Parallels' Parallels. Both applications let you install a Windows XP or Vista virtual machine on your Intel Mac without having to leave OS X, both offer a level of integration between the two operating systems and both retai for $79.99 (USD). So, which virtualization program is the fastest? Well, that's what MacTech attempted to find out in their exhaustive benchmarking trials, comparing Fusion 1.0 (build 51348), Parallels 3.0 (build 5160) and Boot Camp head-to-head-to-head in a variety of different computing tasks.So what's the bottom line? Because of how the software if designed to integrate between the two platforms, Parallels came out ahead in many of MacTech's tests. For certain more processor heavy uses, VMWare, thanks to its ability to take advantage of both cores, came out the best. For networking performance, Boot Camp was king. While I found the benchmarking tests very interesting - and useful - prospective buyers should be aware that in the middle of MacTech's testing procedure, all three Windows options for OS X were upgraded. With the release of Leopard, Boot Camp came out of beta and VMWare is now at version 1.1 and Parallels was updated on December 5 to build 5582. I know just from my own unscientific experience, Fusion 1.1 improved significantly in speed and overall performance from version 1.0 and while I was a big fan of Parallels under Tiger, I have "switched" to Fusion for Leopard.Trial-versions are available for both programs. Remember that in order to use Windows XP or Vista, you need a valid user license.Thanks, Rich.
Microsoft lets loose Hyper-V virtualization software beta
Microsoft isn't exactly known for releasing things early, but that's just what its done with the beta version of its new Hyper-V virtualization software, which is included as part of Windows Server 2008 RC1 Enterprise. As Microsoft itself points out, that was originally only expected to be released in the first quarter of 2008, but it says it decided to let things loose early in order to let customers evaluate the feature and provide feedback before the final release. The software itself takes aim squarely at VMWare's territory, allowing users to configure an array of virtual machines and run multiple operating systems simultaneously. If betas aren't your thing, however, you can look for the final version to roll out "within 180 days" of the release of Windows Server 2008.[Via TG Daily]
VMware Importer makes migrating from Parallels a snap
In our post yesterday on VMware Fusion 1.1 we mentioned that VMware had also included a beta of their new Importer application. However, after using it tonight, I thought it was worth a separate post of its own, because it makes migrating from Parallels to Fusion incredibly easy. The amazing thing is that I converted an old Parallels 2.5 WinXP VM which Parallel's 3 itself had not been able to import successfully!Basically, when you start the Importer it gives you a window in which to drop the Parallels .pvs file (just Win2000, WinXP, Win2003 Server or Vista at this time). It asks you where you want to save the new Virtual Machine and a few minutes later, boom it starts right up in Fusion -- no muss and no fuss. For me the amazing thing was that I had previously tried to import the same image into Parallels 3 and it failed. So basically the upshot is this: if you're running Parallels, but you'd like to give Fusion a try, the barrier to entry has now dropped to next to nothing (besides the hard drive space). I bought Parallels for my Intel Mac as soon as it was released,but given my experience with Fusion (especially with the downloadable appliances), I think VMware has a convert. I fully recommend giving it a try. The VMware Importer is a free download. It's also supplemented by the VMware convertor which will create an image of a working PC that can then be imported into Fusion as a VM.
VMware Fusion 1.1 released
Even though Leopard ships with Boot Camp, lots of Mac users still get their virtual groove on with VMware Fusion, and its super-slick window display tool Unity. Today VMware announced Fusion 1.1, an upgrade that sports some cool new features and improvements: As expected, the upgrade now supports Leopard Better 3D graphics via the "experimental support" for DirectX 9.0 Full Vista and XP support A beta version of VMware Importer, a tool that allows users to quickly import virtual machines (including Boot Camp) Overall better speed and performance All told, there are about 25 enhancements in Fusion 1.1. Pat Lee, VMware's senior product manager for Mac products, told me that this upgrade is "all about giving the user choice." He points out that the biggest advantage of Fusion over Boot Camp is the ability to access your Windows virtual machine on the fly. Lee says that, unlike Boot Camp, it's not necessary to shut down your Mac and reboot into Windows every time you want to get to a Windows app. Instead, just use the Unity tool to co-mingle your Windows and Mac apps right on the same screen. On the other hand, if dual-booting is your thing, you can always use Importer to create a virtual machine.The upgrade is free for existing customers. If you're ready to try it out for the first time, snag a free 30-day evaluation from the company Web site or purchase it for $59.99 with a $20 rebate (US only).
Will Leopard allow virtualization of OS X Server?
Big-iron system admins with a Mac streak (there's more of them than you'd think) would dearly love to see a fully virtualizable version of Mac OS X Server, one that could be slotted into a VMware infrastructure on third-party hardware, and run alongside other server OSes like Windows Server, Linux and Solaris, sharing hardware resources and reducing administrative costs. Shame that it won't happen: Apple's licensing doesn't permit running 10.x Server on anything other than Apple gear. There is some change in the air, though, as a careful reading of the new license agreement for Server 10.5 reveals -- virtualization of OS X Server on OS X Server may be coming sooner rather than later.A post on the Macenterprise mailing list and an article at TidBITS take note of this licensing change, which now would seem to explicitly permit the use of multiple instances of Mac OS X Server on a single Apple machine. With this green light, applications like the in-early-beta Parallels Server and the unannounced but surely-in-progress VMware equivalent could provide multiple instances of OS X Server along with Linux or Windows VMs, all on the same box. Depending on how your network services are set up, this could be a big help in selling X Server into your organization.We'll keep an eye on both Parallels and VMware for future announcements in server virtualization. Exciting times!via Adam Engst/twitter. Thanks to everyone else who sent this in.
VMware Fusion beta 1.1 available
Looks like the VMware team may be picking up a few pointers from the "release early, release often" cheerleaders at rival virtualization shop Parallels; the recently-released Fusion for Mac is now out in a 1.1 beta form, downloadable with registration. The beta packs a load of features, full list below -- top additions include DirectX 9.0 support, iPhone/Outlook sync, Unity and Boot Camp functional improvements, and (just in time) better compatibility with host systems running Leopard. The beta also squashes a bug that has bitten me a couple of times: the Airport process randomly ramping up to 100% CPU with Fusion installed.The beta clocks in at a hefty 170 MB, and you'll get an evaluation serial number good for 30 days when you sign up to download the software. Let us know how the beta works out for you in the comments.Thanks Joy & RMS
Vista SP1 to support EFI booting standard - what does this mean for Boot Camp?
Rounding up on 9 months of Vista being on the market, Microsoft is of course at work on Service Pack 1 which is slated for an early 2008 release. At the official Windows Vista blog, Brandon LeBlanc has offered extensive details on what the focus of Service Pack 1 is, and while much of it is targeted at businesses and independent software vendors, an interesting section outlining some of the fundamentals mentions that support for the EFI booting standard is on its way (under the Introducing Windows Vista Service Pack 1 section; there aren't any anchors I can link in this extensive post, so you'll have to search for that title or simply 'EFI').In their hype and marketing for Boot Camp, Apple makes a pretty big deal about Intel-based Macs supporting EFI while "Windows XP, and even Vista, are stuck in the 1980s with old-fashioned BIOS" (check the sidebar of the Boot Camp page). So what could it mean if Vista catches up to the EFI bandwagon? I'm not quite sure yet. It could likely make the Boot Camp engineers' lives a lot easier, and while I know less about virtualization software like Parallels Desktop and VMware Fusion, they might be able to sleep better at night as well. Ultimately, if EFI support in Vista makes it easier for Apple to support running Windows on a Mac, this could likely yield even more sales from swtichers - especially those who need Vista for things like work or gaming. As to speculation on whether this could bring some of the wilder stuff like running Windows apps in Mac OS X without the need for the Windows OS or virtualization tools, I'll leave that to the tin foil hat enthusiasts in the audience.Thanks Adam
Pano Logic's Pano: virtual XP or Vista in a box
Check it CIOs, Pano Logic just announced their new Pano virtualization device which brings XP and Vista to your users without the need of a PC. According to the feisty startup, their new virtualization solution can cut your Total Cost of Ownership by 70% for a promised savings of $3,200 per desktop over three years. While you can ace the desktop PC, you'll still have to make the initial investment of $20 per month per device (one per user) with perpetual licenses available. The Pano device has no CPU, memory, operating system or drivers -- at least not in the way those items are typically perceived by your IT staff. A "Pano Logic chip" manages the virtualization. In other words: no client-side malware or hiccups for fewer deskside visits -- everything is managed centrally from your VMWare Server installation. The device does pack the required jacks for a VGA display (up to 1600 x 1200 pixels supported), USB keyboard and Mouse (3x total USB), 10/100Mbps Ethernet, and a pair of mini-jacks for audio in/out. Of course, the system is entirely dependent upon lickity quick, uncongested pipes so if you're sporting a latency above 5-ms, you can forget about Pano's virtualization. Check out the business minded, ass-end of the Pano after the break.[Via PCMag]
CNET Labs benchmarks Parallels and Fusion virtualization products
Whenever two options are presented, it is often a smart move to weight the pros and cons of each and make a decision based on your needs. If you need to push Windows in a virtualization environment, Daniel A. Begun at CNET Labs has benchmarked Windows Vista running in both Parallels Desktop and VMware Fusion. The short of the long? If you really need to push Windows, do it in Boot Camp if at all possible. If Boot Camp is out of the question, VMware Fusion was the winner in heavy duty, multimedia tasks by a landslide, due largely in part to its support of multiple core processors (Parallels, as of this writing, only supports one core per CPU). On the flip side, however, Parallels Desktop is the only virtualization product that supports 3D gaming right now, but as a Parallels owner, I'll still vouch for running your games in Windows via Boot Camp.At the end of the CNET Labs day, both apps still have their pros and cons. Begun hails Parallels Desktop for being the more usable and intuitive of the two (and during my initial tests of both before deciding to buy, I agreed), though I had a much easier time getting non-Windows OSes installed in VMware Fusion (to this day, Parallels Desktop still won't install Ubuntu, and I have received no response as to why). Still, the moral of this particular story is that if performance is at the very top of your virtualization shopping list, VMware Fusion is, at least for now, the reigning champion. Check Begun's full article for more details on the tests and how they were performed.
Dell collaborating with software makers on virtual PCs
Apparently, Dell is working with VMware (makers of Fusion) and SWsoft (the team behind Parallels) to develop new computers with virtualization features for a new line of the company's PCs. According to reports, Dell's chief technology officer Kevin Kettler confirmed the collaboration at the Linuxworld conference in San Francisco. The plans right now are for the systems to tackle virtual versions of Windows and Linux which could run in tandem on a user's machine, though when asked about support for Apple's OS X on the virtual PCs, Kettler said "I can't speculate on that," but went on to say "virtualization is very powerful. It's an environment that would allow many different operating systems to coexist. You can interpret that however you would like." So -- at least as far as we can tell -- not an out-and-out "no."[Via Pocket-lint]
VMware Fusion officially available today
There are two kinds of virtualization products for the Mac: first, the kind that develop fast, release quick, and damn the torpedoes; second, the kind that bake in the goodness and hold off on a release until everything meets the exacting standards of an enterprise software vendor. Today we get to see the final result of the second approach, as VMware Fusion is officially shipping after an extensive beta release. (Still love ya, Parallels, don't ever change.)Fusion is available for $60 (after a $20 rebate) and offers all the XP-running, virtual-appliance-library downloading, window integrating, 3D emulating features you'd expect. I'm planning to do a little bake-off between the agile rookie and the wily veteran, now that everyone's on a fully released & supported plateau, to see which of the two meets my needs best.
New Parallels Desktop beta supports iPhone
Trust us, the irony of someone needing to sync an Apple device through Windows that's running on a Mac is glaringly obvious, but hey, some folks just can't escape Outlook no matter how hard they try. Nevertheless, the new Parallels Desktop beta (which is available now) does add iPhone support in Windows XP and Vista along with a newly fortified Image Tool / Explorer and coherence windows that now work with Expose. Of course, you should recognize that this stuff is indeed still in beta, but if you're the daring (or overly trusting) type, feel free to hit the read link and get your download on.[Via AppleInsider]